WesWorld

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
(1) those who want to attend the opening of the Canal, and send dignataries or ships please PM or reply here.

Chilean President Eduardo Vizcarro will attend aboard the destroyer leader Angamos; but the Chileans will feel no compulsion to actually traverse the canal with her (they'll just stay on the Pacific side and use one of their steam launches to inspect the works).

The French Navy will send sail training ship Étoile, en route to port calls on the Pacific coast. The French ambassador to Mexico will be present.

Quoted

(1) those who want to attend the opening of the Canal, and send dignataries or ships please PM or reply here.

The German Ambassador to the United States, Friedrich Wilhelm von Prittwitz und Gaffron, and his colleague, the German Ambassador to Mexico,Herbert von Dirksen, will both attend. Germany will eschew the despatch of any naval vessels.

Great Britain will send the following dignataries;

The Great British Ambassador to the United States, Viscount Halifax
The Great British Ambassador to Mexico, Sir Charles Bateman
Commander in Chief Americas and West Indies, Vice-Admiral Reginald Harvey

Representing NATO
SACLANT: Admiral Sir Percy Lockhart Harnam Noble
SOLANTCOM: Admiral Sir Henry Ruthven Moore

Great Britain will send the following ships;
Battleship: HMS Lion
Cruisers: HMS Sussex and HMS Iron Duke
Destroyers: HMS Musketeer and HMS Undaunted

To mark this engineering achievement, the United Kingdoms of the Netherlands will send the following delegates, arriving from Europe, Africa and the Indies.

From the Far East, on board the rebuilt Friesland heavy cruiser Fleroland, the Governor of the province of the Sunda Islands, Airlannge Tunggawijaya,

On the Royal yacht Nassau :
Prince Alexander, Luitenant ter Zee 1ste klasse, Naval Attache to SAE, and Kongo Minister of Foreign Affairs, Count Nzinga Mvemba

On board the heavy Cruiser King Albert, the Belgian Minister of Economic affairs, Count Jean Charles Snoy et d'Oppuers

July 1942

This month the Mexican Canal is opened with a ceremony on July 4th. A number of dignataries are on hand to witness the ceremony, President Wilkie, and Secretary of State Vandenburg representing the United States along with General MacArthur as the commander of the US forces in the Canal Zone, General Arnold representing the Army Air Forces, and Admiral Kimmel, commander of the USN Pacific Fleet. Representing Mexico are the Mexican President, and the Atlantean Ambassador to Mexico is representing his country at the ceremony. From the United Kingdom and its Dominions beyond the Seas, are Vixcount Halifax, British Ambassador to the United States, Sir Charles Bateman, British Ambassador to Mexico, Vice-Admiral Harvey, Commander in Chief of the British forces in the Americas and West Indies, Admiral's Noble and Moore representing two of NATO's different command areas, Mr. Pearsen, Deputy Secretary General to NATO, representing Canada, and the Australian Ambassadors to the United States and Mexico. Representing Germany and France were the German Ambassadors to the United States and Mexico, Herr Gaffron and Herr Dirksen, and the French ambassador to Mexico. From the Kingdom of the Netherlands, three dignataries were present, the Govenor of the Sunda Islands, Airlannge Tunggawijaya, Prince Alexander Naval Attache to the SAE, and Count Mvemba Minster of Foreign Affairs for the Kongo. Representing the Kingdom of Belgium, the Belgian Minister of Economic Affairs Count Jean Charles Snoy et d'Oppuers.

A number of warships were also on hand for the ceremony, the US battleships USS Arizona, USS Pennsylvania, USS Texas, USS New Mexico, USS Idaho, USS Mississippi, the Mexican battlecruiser Chapultepec, cruisers Hermosilla andMerida, gunboats Obregon andCarranzza minelayer General Zaragoza, and numerous smaller ships. From France, the French sail training ship the Étoile from Chile the destroyer leader Angamos, from Great Britain the battleship HMS Lion, the cruisers HMS Sussex and HMS Iron Duke and two destroyers. From the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Dutch cruiser Fleroland, the Royal yacht Nassau and the Belgian cruiser King Albert. From Australia, the cruiser
HMAS Sydney and from Chile the destroyer leader Angamos. A number of warships are also sent by the Royal Canadian Navy and Imperial Atlantean Navy.

The honor of the first vessel through the canal is given to the US battleship USS Arizona followed by her sister USS Pennsylvania. Following the two battleships are the Mexican battlecruiser Chapultepec.

In naval news, two new aircraft carriers are laid down this month, USS Intrepid and USS Wasp. Intrepid is to be sister of USS Essex while the Wasp will be an improved Hornet. Also laid down this month are the second pair of Los Angeles class cruisers named USS New Orleans and USS Indianapolis. Finally, in a bid to increase the USN's amphibious capabilities, four of a new type of landing craft are laid down called Landing Ship Tank.

In Army News, the T22 Armored Car design is chosen as the next armored car for the US Army. Initially the concept was for a fast tank destroyer, however the 1.5in gun is no longer considered suitable for use against tanks, so it will instead be used as a fast reconnaisance vehicle instead. Armed with a 1.5in gun and 0.50 and 0.30 machine guns, the M8 will have a top speed of 56mph. Series production expected by the end of 1942.

In Air Force News, the Douglas A-26 bomber begins production this month.

In domestic news, Nash-Kelvinator Corporation buys Dusenberg Motors. George Mason in a press release describes the sale as a friendly takeover, and has high hopes of expanding the Duesenberg name to Europe eventually.

Huzzah! The mountains are split asunder and the Mexican Canal links the seas at last. HAPAG, NDL and half the tramp steamer captains of the world are very happy.

I can see many cash tills ringing ker-ching all over the world. American east-west trade will be revolutionised one step furter and European trade with the West Coast also improved and trading routes to Japan etc. cut.

Time to figure out how to put the Panama Canal out of business...

Highly unlikely that the Panama Canal will go out of business. Frankly, even though the Mexican Canal cuts short a bit of the trip from the east coast of the US to the west coast, the Panama Canal is still going to be the far cheaper option (due to its shorter length) for most traffic, and geographically better-situated for most traffic that's not going from the east to west coast.

And really, aside from very large bulk cargoes, most traffic from the US east coast to the US west coast and vice-versa moves by railway, not ship. It underscores the fact that the Mexican Canal is not a primarily commercial venture - it's a military one, meant solely to move American battleships between the oceans.

Brock is quite correct, the commercial viability of the Mexican Canal over the exisiting Panama Canal is neglible to non-existant. The primary reason for building the Canal as I can understand is a safe passage for US warships between the oceans, and a prestige gain, the whole "mine is bigger" thing the Americans have.

Now, interestingly the current US administration also views the viability of forcefully removing the Panama Canal from Iberian possession as an act that costs more than any potential profit such an enterprise might bring. And of course for the US if a war isn't profitable there isn't much point in fighting one is there?

Who has subisdised the cost of building the Mexican Canal? The most expensive construction programme in WW is going to need returns to pay for the costs. I can't imagine the American and Mexican taxpayers and investors are going to be happy looking at a highly expensive stretch of water to see the odd tramp steamer and US/ Mexican warship going past with the likelihood of paying off the construction costs in around 2040...

I'm not saying the Panama is dead, far from it, but I think the latter will suit South American traffic and the Mexican canal US and Canadian traffic and perhaps northen Pacific routes to Japan and Russia. It might stimulate some additional trade, as Brock says intercontinental US travel is still going to be rail and air.

Given the technology of the time, most US transcontinental *freight* traffic would move by water, rather than rail. The costs were far less; containerization and intermodal traffic changed that in the last quarter of the century. Indeed, Seatrain Lines (a later container operator) was founded to carry rail cars from New York to New Orleans because is was cheaper to ship them by sea than haul them by rail.

Nevertheless, having two canals will merely split however much traffic there is; the Panama Canal is already paid for and can stand the loss of revenue for a while. How long the Mexican Canal can stand on its own is a very good question.

I was talking of putting the Panama canal out of commission...

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
I was talking of putting the Panama canal out of commission...

Quite. But you're much more likely to put Mexico out of commission than the Panama Canal.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
I was talking of putting the Panama canal out of commission...

Quite. But you're much more likely to put Mexico out of commission than the Panama Canal.

Touché

Quoted

Now, interestingly the current US administration also views the viability of forcefully removing the Panama Canal from Iberian possession as an act that costs more than any potential profit such an enterprise might bring. And of course for the US if a war isn't profitable there isn't much point in fighting one is there?

I do not think that building the Mexican Canal makes or made much sense finacially. The Treasury knows that the American taxpayers aren't likely to get a dime back from building this thing. From a purely monetary perspective building the Canal makes no sense at all IMHO. However, if you spin the rationale for building the Canal as a military and prestige item rather than an economic one, the American people may be willing to swallow the cost. Or, they may not. But that is why they have elections.

Quoted

Quite. But you're much more likely to put Mexico out of commission than the Panama Canal

Nah... just a matter of "accidentally" sinking say a cement freighter in a strategic location...

Blocking the Canal that way Foxy would only block it for a few days, a week at most. You wanted to put it out of business, sinking a cement freighter just stops it for a short amount of time.

Nitrate carrier catching fire near the dam?

Hmm, depends on the nitrates, and one would assume you would need to have the ship close to the dam. The Iberians aren't stupid, they would likely have access to the dam be restricted, and have patrol boats in Gatun Lake to stop ships getting close.